It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SCJ RBG unable to continue duties who confirms & decides a new SCJ appointment is nessesary

page: 2
16
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: proximo
So if a supreme court judge were to go into a coma, and was being kept alive with a respirator, are you telling me they can't be replaced because they are not dead?

If that is the case we have a big problem.

I am getting the feeling the Democrats are waiting to announce she needs to step down till there is a year left in Trumps first term. Than they are going to say Republicans set the standard with Garland that she cannot be replaced till the next term.


Impeachment... we have a process people are just ignoring it.




posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

en.wikipedia.org... its only happened once and they were not even removed


Samuel Chase (April 17, 1741 – June 19, 1811) was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and a signatory to the United States Declaration of Independence as a representative of Maryland. He was impeached by the House on grounds of letting his partisan leanings affect his court decisions but was acquitted by the Senate and remained in office.
just as i dont think the republicans would wait during an election year to appoint a new scotus justice if opportunity presented its self there is absolutely zero chance of democratic house supporting Impeachment of Ginsberg



President Thomas Jefferson, alarmed at the seizure of power by the judiciary through the claim of exclusive judicial review, led his party's efforts to remove the Federalists from the bench. His allies in Congress had, shortly after his inauguration, repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801, abolishing the lower courts created by the legislation and terminating their Federalist judges despite lifetime appointments; Chase, two years after the repeal in May 1803, had denounced it in his charge to a Baltimore grand jury, saying that it would "take away all security for property and personal liberty, and our Republican constitution will sink into a mobocracy."[7] Earlier in April 1800, Chase acting as a district judge, had made strong attacks upon Thomas Cooper, who had been indicted under the Alien and Sedition Acts; Chase had taken the air of a prosecutor rather than a judge.[8] Also in 1800, when a grand jury in New Castle, Delaware declined to indict a local printer, Chase refused to discharge them, saying he was aware of one specific printer that he wished them to indict for seditious behavior.[9] Jefferson saw the attack as indubitable bad behavior and an opportunity to reduce the Federalist influence on the judiciary by impeaching Chase, launching the process from the White House when he wrote to Congressman Joseph Hopper Nicholson of Maryland, asking: "Ought the seditious and official attack [by Chase] on the principles of our Constitution . . .to go unpunished?"[10] Virginia Congressman John Randolph of Roanoke took up the challenge and took charge of the impeachment. The House of Representatives served Chase with eight articles of impeachment in late 1803, one of which involved Chase's handling of the trial of John Fries. Two more focused on his conduct in the political libel trial of James Callender. One article covered Chase's conduct with the New Castle grand jury, charging that he "did descend from the dignity of a judge and stoop to the level of an informer by refusing to discharge the grand jury, although entreated by several of the said jury so to do." Three articles focused on procedural errors made during Chase's adjudication of various matters, and an eighth was directed at his "intemperate and inflammatory … peculiarly indecent and unbecoming … highly unwarrantable … highly indecent" remarks while "charging" or authorizing a Baltimore grand jury. On March 12, 1804, the House voted 73 to 32 to impeach Chase. [11] The United States Senate—controlled by the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans—began the impeachment trial of Chase on February 9, 1805, with Vice President Aaron Burr presiding and Randolph leading the prosecution. All the counts involved Chase's work as a trial judge in lower circuit courts. (In that era, Supreme Court justices had the added duty of serving as individuals on circuit courts, a practice that was ended in the late 19th century.) The heart of the allegations was that political bias had led Chase to treat defendants and their counsel in a blatantly unfair manner. Chase's defense lawyers called the prosecution a political effort by his Republican enemies. In answer to the articles of impeachment, Chase argued that all of his actions had been motivated by adherence to precedent, judicial duty to restrain advocates from improper statements of law, and considerations of judicial efficiency.
his original cause for impeachment and subsequent failure to remove him even though the judge wanted some one locked up for pretty much not liking the guy and saying things he didn't like ,so barring legal or ethical misconduct its rare for a federal judge to be removed let alone a SCOTUS justice



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas



just as i dont think the republicans would wait during an election year to appoint a new scotus justice if opportunity presented its self there is absolutely zero chance of democratic house supporting Impeachment of Ginsberg

It would be terrible optics for the Dems to support retaining a SCOTUS justice that was comatose.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

that is very much true, not sure some of them would care but it would not play well in the media and would pretty much validate a good deal of what the repbulicans have been saying for months now



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TheJesuit

The Lack of News and Real Proof of RBG's present state of Health is due to the Fact that her " Clone Replacement " has not Matured enough yet to take over Her Identity on the SCOTUS . When that happens , She will come out of Seclusion in Perfect Health to Continue to Destroy Law and Order in the United States . There , I SAID It ...........



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Has anyone seen a CURRENT pic video or anything ? all i see is regurgitated photos and even a regurgitated clip on CNN

I want PROOF undisputed on capacity to continue Legal Duties to the SCOTUS She's gotta be drugged out of her mind which affect decisions........



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheJesuit
Has anyone seen a CURRENT pic video or anything ? all i see is regurgitated photos and even a regurgitated clip on CNN

I want PROOF undisputed on capacity to continue Legal Duties to the SCOTUS She's gotta be drugged out of her mind which affect decisions........


I'm sure she really was at the Supreme Court today, but the lack of a new picture leads me to suspect that she's in very bad shape. (Moreso than before.)




top topics



 
16
<< 1   >>

log in

join